616 réponses à ce sujet

[Volus Warlord]

EntropicAngel wrote...

Volus Warlord wrote...

You sound like the people from the bug report forum who tried to tell me bugs were my fault.

Let me scrap that statement and say something else: happy =/= accomplishment.

Lack of accomplishment = futility = unhappy

[Nefla]

I'm all for self sacrifice and PC death as long as it makes sense, fits with the rest of the game/series and is my choice. A large portion of my DA:O playthroughs ended with the warden doing the ultimate sacrifice, but sacrifice means nothing if you can't choose.

[CELL55]

I think the main lesson is:
Don't have the final boss of an epic space opera be a programming error that talks your character into committing suicide for no good gorram reason.

[Sjpelke]

No need for complete sugar endings, loose ends are what annoy me.

Choice in that would make things perfect though....endings that matter due to the choices given in the game.

Modifié par TsadeeHekate, 02 mars 2013 - 08:51 .

[Bekkael]

Cthulhu42 wrote...

I'm sure there will be an equivalent to The Pearl or Blooming Rose in the game at which we will be able to get many a "happy ending".

Well, I never!

[-TC1989-]

EntropicAngel wrote...

Mikoto8472 wrote...

Nor do I play games to get an ending where my avatar just 'disappears' like in DAO and especially DA2.

Like every Bioware game ever, you mean.

Not ever, but most of them. It's a Bioware standard.

lol To be honest that never really struck me until you said that. Maybe thats why I'm always feeling alittle underwhelmed at most of their endings. The first two Mass Effects never bothered me because I knew they were building into something, and that always got me more and more excited each ending.

Now I hate black and white endings, and I still believe that Bioware are a group of great writers. Which is why not just for the RPG genres sake, but theirs as well that there needs to be a few endings to back up the deep choices that will be in this game. That for good or ill, there's repercussions for every choice you make.

Modifié par -TC1989-, 02 mars 2013 - 08:50 .

[Wulfram]

EntropicAngel wrote...

The main lesson of ME3 is that people don't understand happy endings.

Sentient spaceships who've harvested the galaxy for MILLENNIA MILLENNIA MILLENNIA being destroyed = happy ending. Or if not happy, then certainly, absolutely, having accomplished the objective.

If you don't understand that, well, that's not Bioware's problem.

If we talk about the Original cut, then Bioware did a rather bad job of conveying that you had in fact accomplished the objective.  Synthesis it seemed like you'd completed the villain's objective, with no real reason to think this is a good thing, Control it seemed like you'd become the viillain and Destroy you might have stopped the Reapers but it didn't seem like you'd really managed to save this cycle of galactic civilisation.

Which is perhaps a point worth making - if you're going to leave a lot of stuff up to speculation, you can't know what they'll speculate, and you need to make sure you're giving the right sort of cues as to the direction the speculation leads.  When you're coming off a generally dark ending, you can't expect that people will realise everything was supposed to magically turn out all right after the credits rolled.

[TheJediSaint]

EntropicAngel wrote...

Volus Warlord wrote...

Lack of accomplishment = futility = unhappy

What I mean by that statement is that Shepard most definitely accomplished something, something unfathomably huge--we just can't understand how big that is.

To me, accomplishing something is more important than being happy.

The problem that I had with the ending was not any lack of accomplishment, but a lack of coherence.  Espeically when talking about the pre-EC ending.

Edit: And there I go, posting in a thread that has little to do with DA3.

Modifié par TheJediSaint, 02 mars 2013 - 08:56 .

[Volus Warlord]

EntropicAngel wrote...

Volus Warlord wrote...

Lack of accomplishment = futility = unhappy

What I mean by that statement is that Shepard most definitely accomplished something, something unfathomably huge--we just can't understand how big that is.

To me, accomplishing something is more important than being happy.

Let's go pre-extended cut again here.

[SPOILERS] The Citadel was destroyed or (probably) purged, the races were largely purged if not extinct, the relays themselves may have been destroyed, and the homeworlds were burning. Oh, and you die too. [/SPOILERS] 

What did you you accomplish? All that you fought to save is already dead, or is a short distance from it. There really wasn't much to be optimistic about. Your goal was to save your race and your friends, first and foremost, and in large part you failed. Dealing with the reapers was the means, not the ends. Saving future races? Whoop-de-freakin'-do. More beings that will fight you in the future. 

If I have the means but don't achieve the ends, what does that get me?

Modifié par Volus Warlord, 02 mars 2013 - 08:58 .

[Applepie_Svk]

the main lesson is to not being a lazy, cutting core of narrative into DLCs and stop hiding behind artistic integrity when you´ve screwed up.

[Inquisitor Recon]

Nope. Grimdark ending. I want a grimdark ending.

[wright1978]

I'd say the lesson of ME3's ending is to:

Integrate the ending into the story, rather than bolt it on the end.
Have varied outcomes for the protaganist with equal levels of closure.

[HurricaneGinger]

I don't want the only option to be a happy ending - just providing the choice of one would be nice. 

In ME3 I disliked that the only three options assured Shepard's death unless you played MP and I disliked that I had to pay for Gold in order to play MP and get the ending I wanted for two of my Shepards.

Two.

The rest of my Shepards will choose Control or Synthesis because that is the choice they would make with absolute certainty or hesitation. I am going to play DA3 multiple times with a different protagonist each time, and I want an option that fits with each of them. Taking that away in ME3 was stifling. 

Modifié par PhantomGinger, 02 mars 2013 - 09:01 .

[Dave of Canada]

Despite what people think about ME3, ME3's problem wasn't that it was a bad ending but the fact that it was poorly written. A poorly written ending makes people angry, a bad ending makes people sad. There's a difference.

Modifié par Dave of Canada, 02 mars 2013 - 09:02 .

[Uccio]

The bottom line is, what everyone who enjoys RPG's should agree, that the ending should be dictated dy choices done through out the whole game. So it can be sunshine and lollipops or it can be death and destruction. Choice and consequence people.

[Newschmoo]

Ukki wrote...

The bottom line is, what everyone who enjoys RPG's should agree, that the ending should be dictated dy choices done through out the whole game. So it can be sunshine and lollipops or it can be death and destruction. Choice and consequence people.

My sentiments exacty!

[Iakus]

Foopydoopydoo wrote...

If the happy ending is an option only then fine. But I like mah bittersweetness. So if there is a happy ending I'd like for it to be kind of a cop out, where the protag just chooses to leave or skip away merrily off into the sunset with his/her LI. Personally I would detest an ending that was completely sunshine and rainbows. Luckily Bioware's track record isn't leaning in that direction.

This is where DAO succeeded and ME3 failed.

And thus why I have a bit more hope fro DA3

[Sylvanpyxie]

I personally think that Closure and Choice are the two important factors for a good ending, but I don't expect to have both in Dragon Age.

Closure is especially important in the Dragon Age franchise, due to the fact we'll have no returning protagonists. Simply making them all disappear creates more problems than it solves, leaving loose ends for characters that are essentially dead and gone for the Player.

Choice is important, but I don't expect it at this point. Origins offered us a choice, but it's more of an illusion, really. The choices themselves are going to be impossible to deal with - Bioware gave us the options, but in the long run the choices are unlikely to matter or they're simply going to be changed to suit Bioware's needs (aka "canon").

Stand Alone games don't have this problem - The Developers create a protagonist, tell a story and the story ends.... Dragon Age is a franchise that's running the story-train all the way through it and that means that we're either going to lose choice or we're never going to receive closure.

It's a shame really, but at this point I can't see us getting both Choice and Closure..... Dragon Age 2 offered us neither, so I suppose Bioware could improve on *that* by giving us one of the two.

Modifié par Sylvanpyxie, 02 mars 2013 - 09:11 .

[Huyna]

written. A poorly written ending makes people angry, a bad ending makes people sad.

True.

For example, in the very end of Baldur's Gate2: Throne of Bhaal (just in case - an add-on that concluded and epic story started in Baldur's Gate and Baldur's Gate 2 ) player had a choice to either give up his god-like essence and live as a mortal or to become god - thus leaving your friends,  your  sweetheart and, in certain cases, even your new born son beyond, knowing that from now on you are immortal - and they are not. It was sad yet great ending. Though, it was up to us what to choose.

Modifié par Huyna, 02 mars 2013 - 09:14 .